PRINCETON BOROUGH -- An advocate for the control of
biological weapons who has been gathering information about last autumn's
anthrax attacks said yesterday the Federal Bureau of Investigation has a strong
hunch about who mailed the deadly letters.

But the FBI might be "dragging its feet" in pressing
charges because the suspect is a former government scientist familiar with
"secret activities that the government would not like to see disclosed," said
Barbara Hatch Rosenberg, director of the Federation of American Scientists'
Chemical and Biological Weapons Program.

Rosenberg, who spoke to about 65 students, faculty members
and others at the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs at
Princeton University, said the FBI has known of the suspect since October and,
according to her "government insider" sources, has interrogated him more than
once.

The investigation into five anthrax-laced letters and
several other hoax letters -- all mailed last fall, including several processed
by Trenton Main Post Office in Hamilton -- was the focus of Rosenberg's talk.
She also gave her thoughts about what the government should do to control
biological weapons.

"There are a number of insiders -- government insiders --
who know people in the anthrax field who have a common suspect," Rosenberg said.
"The FBI has questioned that person more than once, ... so it looks as though
the FBI is taking that person very seriously."

She said it is quite possible the suspect is a scientist
who formerly worked at the U.S. government's military laboratory at Fort Detrick,
Md.

Rosenberg said she has been gathering information from
press reports, congressional hearings, Bush administration news conferences and
government insiders she would not name.

During a brief question-and-answer session after her talk,
one man wondered whether biological agents truly pose significant dangers to the
public, given the limited number of deaths and illnesses caused by five
anthrax-laced letters.

Without mentioning other biological agents that are far
more deadly and contagious than anthrax, Rosenberg said the potential for a
biological attack is "catastrophic."

Another man wondered if the FBI and other investigators
might be focusing too narrowly on one scientist, saying, "New Jersey is the
epicenter of the international pharmaceutical industry," and many people in
those labs presumably have the skills to handle and refine anthrax.

"I think your argument would have been a good one earlier
on, but I think that the results of the analyses (of the letters and the anthrax
in them) show that access to classified information was essential," Rosenberg
said. "And that rules out most of the people in the pharmaceutical industry... .
It's possible, but they would have had to have access to the information,"
Rosenberg said.

Picking up the conversational thread, another man said,
"People know a lot, and it's a question of what they choose to focus their
knowledge on. Things are invented in parallel," he said.

-- -- --

She said the evidence points to a person who has
experience handling anthrax; who has been vaccinated and has received annual
booster shots; and who had access to classified government information about how
to chemically treat the bacterial spores to keep them from clumping together,
which allows them to remain airborne.

"We can draw a likely portrait of the perpetrator as a
former Fort Detrick scientist who is now working for a contractor in the
Washington, D.C., area," Rosenberg said. "He had reason for travel to Florida,
New Jersey and the United Kingdom... . There is also the likelihood the
perpetrator made the anthrax himself. He grew it, probably on a solid medium and
weaponized it at a private location where he had accumulated the equipment and
the material.

"We know that the FBI is looking at this person, and it's
likely that he participated in the past in secret activities that the government
would not like to see disclosed," Rosenberg said. "And this raises the question
of whether the FBI may be dragging its feet somewhat and may not be so anxious
to bring to public light the person who did this.

"I know that there are insiders, working for the
government, who know this person and who are worried that it could happen that
some kind of quiet deal is made that he just disappears from view," Rosenberg
said.

"This, I think, would be a really serious outcome that
would send a message to other potential terrorists, that (they) would think they
could get away with it.

"So I hope that doesn't happen, and that is my motivation
to continue to follow this and to try to encourage press coverage and pressure
on the FBI to follow up and publicly prosecute the perpetrator."

-- -- --

She expressed disappointment that the U.S. government last
July decided against signing an international biological weapons treaty that
would ban nations from developing such weapons.

"It became clear from congressional testimony that the
reason for this rejection was the need to protect our secret projects,"
Rosenberg said.

During the question-and-answer period, one woman said,
"I'm not sure that I understood you completely, but it seems to me that the
United States government has a double-standard," of wanting other nations to
comply with a weapons ban but wanting freedom to pursue its own program.

"I'm totally shocked by this information," she said,
sending a wave of laughter through the lecture hall.

"They make no bones about it," Rosenberg replied. "On many
occasions they've argued that rules should be for the bad guys, not the good
guys."

Rosenberg said she worries about an "enormous increase" in
money in the Bush budget for research into bioterrorism agents. "There is
already a rush for this funding," she said.

The number of researchers and labs ought to be tightly
controlled, she said. Under the current budget proposal, however, she says the
government will be spreading money around to "a lot more people and a lot more
laboratories around the country from which bioterrorists can emerge, as one just
did.

"By spreading around this access and this knowledge, we're
asking for trouble."